Skip to content
James L and Loren C Rosenzweig Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

James L and Loren C Rosenzweig Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$32k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Religion$105kEducation$39kPhilanthropy$6kEmployment$4kArts & Culture$4kInternational$3kHealth$2kRecreation & Sports$1kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k12 grants · $5k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $27k
$450
Median grant
4
States reached
$630k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MAIMONIDES$14,702
YACHAD$12,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
CHABAD OCEAN SYNAGOGUE$720
AMERICA GIVES$500
BUCKLEY INSTITUTE$500
Individual grant recipient$450
ZAMIR CHORALE OF BOSTON$435
FRIENDS OF CHAVERIM$206
CHMOL$200
ROFEH INTERNATIONAL$180
PAN MASS CHALLENGE$100
CHAI LIFELINE$72
SPECIAL OLYMPICS MASSACHUSETTS$50
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 51% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%ZAMIR CHORALE OF BOSTON: $1k → 8%FRIENDS OF CHAVERIM: $206 → 13%UNITED HATZALAH: $1k → 17%JUDICIAL WATCH: $1k → 14%MAIMONIDES SISTERHOOD: $650 → 11%CHABAD OCEAN SYNAGOGUE: $720 → 13%BUCKLEY INSTITUTE: $500 → 12%TORAH SCHOOL OF GREATER WASHINGTON: $250 → 8%ZAMIR CHORELE OF BOSTON: $1k → 8%ZICHRON TZVI ELIMELECH: $500 → 13%TIVKAH FUND: $2k → 17%MAIMONIDES SISTERHOOD: $450 → 11%CHABAD OCEAN SYNAGOGUE: $400 → 13%EAST COAST JUMBOS HOCKEY: $200 → 12%ZAMIR CHORALE OF BOSTON: $435 → 8%KADIMAH-TORAS MOSHE: $2k → 16%WILLIAM F BUCKLEY JR PROGRAM: $250 → 12%YACHAD OF NEW ENGLAND: $30k → 7%BOSTON KOLLEL: $1k → 16%CHAI LIFETIME: $500 → 17%AUTISM SERVICES ASSOC: $2k → 7%BOSTON KOLLEL: $1k → 16%CHAI LIFELINE: $500 → 17%CHMOL: $200 → 20%AUTISM SERVICES ASSOC: $1k → 7%EAST COAST JUMBOS HOCKEY: $450 → 8%CAMERA: $1k → 16%CHAI LIFELINE: $400 → 17%AUTISM SERVICES ASSOC: $750 → 7%EAST COAST JUMBOS HOCKEY: $400 → 8%KOLLEL OF GREATER BOSTON: $600 → 16%BOSTON KOLLEL: $450 → 16%MAIMONIDES: $15k → 7%MAIMONIDES SCHOOL: $2k → 7%MAIMONIDES: $2k → 7%MAIMONIDES SCHOOL: $2k → 7%MAIMONIDES: $1k → 7%MAIMONIDES SCHOOL: $1k → 7%ROFEH INTERNATIONAL: $1k → 7%AMERICA GIVES: $500 → 17%MAIMONIDES: $620 → 7%MAIMONIDES SCHOOL: $600 → 7%ORTHODOX UNION: $25k → 17%MAIMONIDES: $600 → 7%ORTHODOX UNION: $25k → 17%MAIMONIDES KEHELLAH: $480 → 7%MAIMONIDES: $380 → 7%MAIMONIDES SCHOOL: $270 → 7%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$126k · 21 repeat orgs$40k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +35% since the first grant, against +3% for those funded once.

21 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
20

Total granted

$126k
$37k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+3%

Still filing today

33%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23’24
EducationArts & CultureHealthPublic BenefitInternationalPhilanthropyOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • AS
    AUTISM SERVICES ASSOCIATION INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $4k · revenue +35%
  • ZC
    ZAMIR CHORALE OF BOSTON INC
    3× · 2021–2024 · $2k · revenue +27%
  • TT
    THE TIKVAH FUND
    2× · 2020–2022 · $2k · revenue +199%

Funded once

  • YO
    YACHAD OF NEW ENGLAND
    one grant, 2020 · $30k
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC
    one grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue -45%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE IDF
    one grant, 2023 · $1k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Zichron Avrohom Yosef
Philanthropy
2
Sherit Isroel
—
3
Zicron Eliyahu Inc
—
4
Yeshiva Ohr Yisroel
Philanthropy
5
Shaarei Halacha Inc
Philanthropy
6
Chasdei Dovid Elimelech Inc
Philanthropy
7
Moskowitz Prize for Zionism Inc
—
8
Zohar Hatorah Inc

Religious School

Religion
9
The Nochim & Rivka Zeldes Foundation
—
10
Ezreinu Inc
Health
11
Zichron Moshe Elihu Tzedoka Fund
Philanthropy
12
Zichron Chaim Avraham Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chai Lifeline Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Tikvah Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 45 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
12/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ORTHODOX UNION: $50,000 · OtherORTHODOX UNIONYACHAD: $30,000 · OtherYACHADYACHAD OF NEW ENGLAND: $30,000 · OtherYACHAD OF NEW ENGLANDMAIMONIDES: $20,252 · OtherMAIMONIDESMAIMONIDES SCHOOL: $6,214 · Other+30 more: $18,429 · Other+30 moreZAMIR CHORALE OF BOSTON INC: $2,485 · Arts & CultureFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $1,232 · Arts & CultureTHE TIKVAH FUND: $2,050 · EducationBUCKLEY INSTITUTE INC: $750 · EducationTHE TORAH SCHOOL OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $250 · EducationCHAI LIFELINE INC: $1,526 · HealthCOMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING IN AMERICA INC: $1,000 · InternationalJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $1,000 · Public BenefitAMERICA GIVES INC: $500 · PhilanthropySPECIAL OLYMPICS MASSACHUSETTS INC: $50 · Recreation & Sports
Other$154,895Arts & Culture$3,717Education$3,050Health$1,526International$1,000Public Benefit$1,000Philanthropy$500Recreation & Sports$50

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAUTISM SERVICES ASSOCIATION INC: $3,750 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetZAMIR CHORALE OF BOSTON INC: $2,485 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetTHE TIKVAH FUND: $2,050 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHAI LIFELINE INC: $1,526 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC: $1,232 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetROFEH INC: $1,180 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING IN AMERICA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBUCKLEY INSTITUTE INC: $750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKOLLEL OF GREATER BOSTON INC: $600 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICA GIVES INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetZICHRON TZVI ELIMELECH: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC: $380 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TORAH SCHOOL OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS MASSACHUSETTS INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds AUTISM SERVICES ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ZAMIR CHORALE OF BOSTON INC ↗
  • Who funds THE TIKVAH FUND ↗
  • Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF UNITED HATZALAH INC ↗
  • Who funds ROFEH INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING IN AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
  • Who funds BUCKLEY INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds KOLLEL OF GREATER BOSTON INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICA GIVES INC ↗
  • Who funds ZICHRON TZVI ELIMELECH ↗
  • Who funds PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE TORAH SCHOOL OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC ↗
  • Who funds Met Council Inc ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Joseph and Rae Gann C…Combined Jewish Phila…Dinim FoundationJewish Communal FundThe Ojc FundMorgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…
Joseph and Rae Gann Charitable FoundationFL17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Joseph and Rae Gann Charitable Foundation · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Dinim Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · The Ojc Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization James L and Loren C Rosenzweig Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James L and Loren C Rosenzweig Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Autism Services Association Inc: 96% of income from government
  • Zamir Chorale of Boston Inc: 8% of income from government
  • Kollel of Greater Boston Inc: 4% of income from government
  • The Torah School of Greater Washington Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Special Olympics Massachusetts Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to James L and Loren C Rosenzweig Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to James L and Loren C Rosenzweig Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 45 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on James L and Loren C Rosenzweig Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home